Toivn Sewage, 231 



If you look at Table III. yon vnW. see wliat was tlie average amount 

 of produce wliich we got in three years. Wlien we put on tlie land 

 3000 tons of sewage, we obtained about 2 If tons of produce in one 

 case, and in another nearly 23 tons ; from 6000 tons of sewage we 

 got in one case 32 x tons of produce, and in another 285- ; and from 

 9000 tons of sewage we got only 34 tons of produce in one case, and 

 only 31 in another. As we increased the amount of scAvage, the 

 amount of produce did not increase in equal proportion. In refer- 

 ence to all kind of manming, two and two do not make four, or 

 anything like it. 



If 5000 tons of sewage were used on the acre, the grass, when 

 converted into milk, shoidd produce, at %d. per gallon, from 30Z. to 

 35Z. per acre. I think it possible, therefore, taking the Rugby sewage 

 as the standard of quality, that a farmer who gave something like 

 a halfpenny per ton might obtain a profit, though I should hesitate 

 to affirm that he would do so if he gave much more. 



There are some places in the immediate vicinity of large towns 

 where the land is very favourably situated for the application of 

 sewage, and such cases are of course favourable as regards the ques- 

 tion of a profitable return to the towns. Taking the average of 

 conditions, I don't think a farmer could do very wrong in giving a 

 halfpenny per ton ; but he would do very wrong if he were to give 

 2d., or even a Id. the year roimd, because the experience of all those 

 who have used sewage is against its being worth any such sum. 



As regards the question whether sewage can be profitably applied 

 on arable land, I would observe that it has been more or less a faihu-e 

 wherever it has been so used. At Alnwick, Eugby, and Watford, 

 those who applied it for that purpose have almost ceased doing so on 

 account of the difficulties and expense to which they have been sub- 

 jected. It cannot be applied to arable land except by the hose, and 

 the wear and tear of the hose, and the cost of labour, have proved to 

 be very serious. 



In conclusion, I would advise that sewage to be used by open nms 

 for grass land in quantities of four or five thousand tons per acre, 

 and as far as practicable to produce milk. Under such circumstances 

 I repeat that I do not think a farmer could suffer much harm if 

 he gave a halfpenny a ton for it ; but I should not advise him to give 

 more. (Hear, hear.) 



Dr. VoELCKER said the views of Mr. Lawes on this subject appeared 

 to him perfectly sound, and in accordance with agricultiu'al experience. 

 That gentleman alluded to the fact that it was vain to hope to recover 

 at once all the manuring constituents which were put in the land 

 through the medium of sewage. Sewage did not stand alone in that 

 respect ; every other kind of manure presented the same peculiarity. 

 Whether they used the most concentrated artificial manures, such as 

 guano or superphosphates, or whether they used common stable-dung, 

 in order to get a remunerative crop they must in some cases put in the 

 land five times, in others ten times, in others even a hundred times as 

 much as they took out of it. If a farmer were to put not more manure 

 on his land than is taken out of it in a crop of wheat or roots, he would 



